Supreme Court Dismisses Oppong Nkrumah’s Bid to Overturn Legal Vacation Ruling
Three-member panel unanimously rejects the Ofoase-Ayirebi MP’s review application, clearing the way for selected criminal trials to continue during the judiciary’s legal vacation
Date: September 2, 2026
By: Ebenezer Adugyamfi/ Emmanuel Ayiku for GhanaianNewsCanada
Ghana’s Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed a review application filed by Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, Member of Parliament for Ofoase-Ayirebi, seeking to overturn an earlier ruling that refused to halt criminal trials being conducted during the judiciary’s legal vacation.
The decision, delivered by a three-member panel presided over by Justice Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, represents a major legal victory for the Attorney-General and clears the way for specially authorised High Court judges to continue hearing selected criminal cases throughout the vacation period.
Court says application failed the legal threshold
The Supreme Court held that Oppong Nkrumah’s application failed to satisfy the exceptional legal requirements necessary for the Court to exercise its limited review jurisdiction.
Reading the unanimous decision, Justice Kulendi said the panel had carefully examined the affidavits, written legal arguments and oral submissions presented by both parties before reaching its conclusion.
“Our unanimous decision is that the application failed at the threshold on all grounds and as such ought to be dismissed as unmeritorious,” the Court ruled.
The Court indicated that its detailed reasons for the judgment would be made available at the Registry on September 7, 2026.
How the legal battle began
The dispute originated after the Chief Justice issued warrants authorising selected High Court judges to sit during the legal vacation and continue hearing specific criminal matters considered urgent.
Oppong Nkrumah challenged the constitutional validity of those warrants, arguing that the arrangement violated principles of fairness and equal treatment under the Constitution.
He subsequently sought an interlocutory injunction to suspend the implementation of the warrants pending the determination of his substantive constitutional case.
Earlier injunction was also rejected
Before the review application, Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, sitting as a single Justice of the Supreme Court, dismissed Oppong Nkrumah’s request for an injunction after concluding that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds to justify suspending the vacation court arrangements.
Dissatisfied with that decision, the Ofoase-Ayirebi legislator invoked the Court’s review jurisdiction, asking a full panel to reverse Justice Pwamang’s ruling.
Wednesday’s judgment effectively brings that aspect of the legal challenge to an end.
What the ruling means
The Supreme Court’s decision means that the warrants issued by the Chief Justice remain valid, allowing designated High Court judges to continue hearing selected criminal trials during the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30.
While the substantive constitutional case challenging the legality of the warrants is still pending, the Court has declined to suspend their operation in the meantime.
The ruling ensures that ongoing criminal proceedings authorised under the vacation warrants can continue without interruption.
Judicial vacation and urgent cases
Under Ghana’s judicial system, the legal vacation temporarily limits the hearing of ordinary court matters. However, the Chief Justice has constitutional and statutory authority to issue special warrants permitting judges to sit during the vacation to hear urgent or exceptional cases.
Government has argued that the arrangement is necessary to prevent delays in the administration of justice, particularly in serious criminal matters, while the opposition insists the warrants raise important constitutional questions requiring judicial interpretation.
A significant constitutional milestone
Although Oppong Nkrumah’s review application has now been dismissed, the broader constitutional issues surrounding vacation court warrants remain before the Supreme Court for substantive determination.
For now, however, the judiciary has received a clear endorsement to continue its vacation criminal trials, reinforcing the Court’s position that no exceptional grounds existed to halt the process pending the final constitutional judgment.
